FT 

| MEADE 

UA 23 
. A4 
1916 
Copy 2 


PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION 


HEARINGS 


BEFORE 


THE COMMITTEE ON RULES 

^.3 HOUSE of representatives 

SIXTY-FOURTH CONGRESS 
First Session 


JANUARY 19, 1916 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 














i9'<» 




D. of D. 

SEP 9 !916 


/ * ■ 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 



V 

C 

\ 


Committee on Rules, 

House of Representatives, 
Wednesday , January 19, 1916. 

The committee met at 11 o’clock a. m. 

Present: Representatives Henry (chairman), Garrett, Lenroot, 
Foster, Bennet, Chiperfield, and Patten. 

Present also: Hon. Augustus P. Gardner, Member of Congress 
from Massachusetts; Hon. Clyde H. Tavenner, Member of Congress 
from Illinois; and Hon. Walter I. Hensley, Member of Congress from 
Missouri. 

The committee thereupon proceeded to the consideration of House 
resolution No. T, which is as follows: 

Resolved , That the Speaker appoint a select committee of five members of the 
House, and that such committee be instructed to inquire into the organization, 
membership, expenditures, receipts, and sources thereof of the Navy League, 
Labor’s National Peace Council, the National Security League, and the American 
Defense Society, and for such purposes it shall have power to send for persons 
and papers and administer oaths, and shall have the right to report at any 
time. The expenses of said inquiry shall be paid out of the contingent fund of 
the House upon vouchers approved by the chairman of said committee, to be 
immediately available. 

The Chairman. Mr. Gardner, the committee will hear you on 
your resolution, No. 7. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AUGUSTUS P. GARDNER, MEMBER OF CON¬ 
GRESS FROM MASSACHUSETTS. 

Mr. Gardner. Mr. Chairman, as I wrote to the various members 
of the committee, I believe that my resolution ought to be extended 
in its scope, unless you wish to cut out the investigations of the 
Labor’s National Peace Council for international reasons; and I 
think probably you ought to add, as an association to be investi¬ 
gated, the “ Organization of American Women for Strict Neu¬ 
trality.” 

I am very well satisfied with Mr. Hensley’s resolution, which he 
introduced a month after mine, with this exception, that he only 
proposes to investigate organizations- 

(At this point Mr. Hensley reached the committee room.) 

Mr. Gardner. I was just speaking and saying that I was very 
well satisfied with your resolution, which you introduced a month 
after mine, with this exception, that you only propose to investigate 
organizations, and, I think, Mr. Chairman, you ought to investigate 
individuals who have been active in this propaganda. 

I did not take these statements very seriously about this move¬ 
ment being backed by the makers of munitions of war at first. I no- 

3 


i 




4 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


ticed that some Members of Congress got together somewhere and 
sent some resolutions to the Committee on Military Affairs last year, 
in which they charged that that was the case. - A 

Then, on December 3, 1914, I picked up the New York World and 
found a clear implication in it that I was engaged m this movement 
for pocketbook reasons, pocketbook jingoism, and partisan politics. 
Even that did not trouble me very much, but on the 7th of December, 
1914, I found in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch an editorial entitled 
“Mr. Gardner’s suspicious crusade,” in which the clear implication 
was made that I was dishonest in my purposes. 

And even that did not bother me, until on December 9, 1914, I 
found this dispatch in the New York Herald, under the heading, 
“ President to smother Gardner resolution at any cost.” 

I will read the first part of it. 

President Wilson is prepared to go great length to smother the resolution 
of Representative Augustus P. Gardner, of Massachusetts, for a congressional 
investigation of the preparedness of the United States for war. He even 
hinted— 

That is, the President hinted— 

to-day that the agitation for increased armament is being backed by manufac¬ 
turers of arms and ammunition. This attitude is not likely to calm the advo¬ 
cates of an inquiry. 

So I sent that clipping to the President and asked him whether 
it was so that he had made that statement. He did not answer me, 
but Mr. Tumulty answered me, and said that he was present at that 
meeting, and that he recollected no such remarks. Exactly what I 
expected—I did not suppose for a moment that the President had 
ever made any such observation. 

The Chairman. What was the date of that last clipping you read? 

Mr. Gardner. December 9, 1914. 

Mr. Patten. 1914? 

Mr. Gardner. Yes; when this movement first started. 

Mr. Tumulty wrote to me and said that he was present at the meet¬ 
ing and there was no such statement made, or something to that 
effect. It was precisely as I thought. I did not suppose for a mo¬ 
ment that the President had made the statement. And I kept hoping 
that I would see a public denial, but no public denial came, and so I 
have not been surprised at the spread of this belief—that we were 
actuated by improper motives. 

Mr. Garrett. May I ask, do you think that there was any occasion 
for a public denial ? 

Mr. Gardner. I should have made one if I had been President— 
where a Member of Congress had written to him asking if the thing 
was so. In the first place, I should have answered the Member of 
Congress personally, and I should have personally stated one way or 
another whether I had said it; but that is a matter where each man 
should judge for himself. 

Mr. Bennet. In other words, you think that should have been 
done just as a matter of respect and courtesy? 

Mr. Gardner. No; I do not go into anything of that sort. I think 
the President had an opportunity to put an end to this sort of talk 
and failed to do so. 

I followed very closely the campaign of he gentlemen who are say¬ 
ing that we are actuated by improper motives, and I find that they 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


5 


prove their case by showing that a number of prominent men—like 
Mr. Frick and Mr. Morgan and others—are extensive investors in 
certain large concerns, and that the large concerns are doing munition 
business or armor-plate business, and that those gentlemen are simul¬ 
taneously directors or originators, or something of the kind, of the 
Navy League. 

I happened the other day—Christmas day—to pick up a clipping 
from the newspaper. I had been thinking over the intimation that, 
because Mr. Morgan or Mr. Frick subscribed $2,000 to the Navy 
League, they must have done so out of improper motives, with an 
idea of getting the money back from investments. Just then my 
eye lit on this clipping: 

Frick pays deposits of 41,000 children. 

It tells how Henry C. Frick gave a Christmas gift to the children 
who had lost their money, owing to the failure of the Pittsburgh 
Bank for Savings, and that Frick was settling the bill, paying 
$167,000 to those children for Christmas presents. I could not help 
wondering if he did that with the idea of getting his money back at 
some other future time. 

Then I happened to read the other day about how one of these 
gentlemen under accusation had given a vast sum of money for a 
lying-in hospital, and I wondered if he did that with the idea of 
getting his money back from the cheap labor of the fatherless babies, 
or something of that sort. 

I do not think there is anything wrong with the Navy League. 
That league I confess I know very little about. I am not a member. 

I do not think there is anything wrong with the National Security 
League. I encouraged the gentleman who organized that league to 
go ahead and do so. By the way, I took precautions to write to my 
friend, Mr. Frank L. Polk, who was then corporation counsel for the 
city of New York, and now Solicitor of the State Department, to find 
out what he knew about Mr. Menken, and whether Menken was in¬ 
terested in any of these ammunition concerns. I did that before I 
started to encourage Mr. Menken in organizing a national security 
league. Mr. Polk’s reply was that there was no connection of the 
sort, in his opinion. Polk answered in the negative, as I say, and 
assured me that I could safely encourage Menken, so far as that 
point went. 

As to the American Defense Society, I know less about it. I 
rather think that it has honest men in its management, like Theo¬ 
dore Roosevelt, but I know nothing about its finances. I have seen 
where somebody said that a list of the contributors has been pub¬ 
lished. I know "the Navy League has published theirs. The National 
Security League has published theirs. The Labor’s National Peace 
Council has not published theirs. The Organization of American 
Women for Strict Neutrality has not published theirs. 

And, then, I think you ought to call somebody like Mr. Nicholas 
Murray Butler before you. Last spring I noticed how he gave an in¬ 
terview to the effect that he had arranged for a thousand speeches to 
be made against “ militarism,” I think he called it, during the sum¬ 
mer, and I wondered who was going to pay for those speeches. 

For instance, I have had a great many joint debates on this sub¬ 
ject. I have been repeatedly approached by the persons who have 


6 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


invited me to speak, and when I would go away they would say, 
“ Now, how much is your bill? ” I have invariably said that, with 
the exception of one occasion, which was at the very beginning or 
this movement, for reasons which I can specify, if necessary but 
upon one occasion, which happened to be 1914, I took my expenses-— 
well, I took $100 for speaking in St. Louis. It is fair to say that I 
went there to speak on another subject, and that my topic was 
switched at the last moment. Otherwise, invariably, to the best of 
my recollection, I have paid my own expenses, and I certainly have 
not accepted any money. 

I am perfectly ready at any time to submit to questions as to my 
investments. 

But I mention all that because I often found that the local debate 
managers expressed surprise, and said, “ Why, your opponent has 
had his expenses paid.” I said. “ Bv you ? ” and they generally re¬ 
plied, “ No.” 

Mr. Chiperfield. Who do you refer to as your opponents? 

Mr. Gardner. I had 13 joint debates—somewhere around that. 
Bev. Hull or Prof. Hull was one of them, from Swarthmore College, 
I remember particularly. I was told his expenses were paid by the 
Carnegie people. Mv impression is that I stated it publicly in a 
subsequent debate, and I rather think that Prof. Hull admitted it 
being the case; I will not be sure of that. 

Then, I found myself in joint debate with Mr. Hamilton Holt. 
I made that statement, and he said, “ Yes; but after I paid my 
expenses out of the check there was practically nothing left.” That 
was the occasion in which Holt made the statement that he knew of 
a Senator who was paid $5,000 for his vote on some munitions or 
armament question. That debate took place at Brockton. I chal¬ 
lenged Holt at once to name the Senator, and he did not do it; and 
then I went into this question I have just gone into. 

Mr. Bryan, of course, has a perfect right to make money out of 
his crusade against preparedness, if he chooses to do so. However, 
if his speeches are paid for the public is less likely to put faith in 
his accusations, especially when he himself refuses to make good 
when they are challenged. 

With Mr. Tavenner and me it is different. We are handsomely 
paid to legislate for the country. If we are making additional money 
out of our campaign for and against “preparedness,” our constitu¬ 
ents are entitled to know that fact. Nothing so surely undermines 
the esteem in which the Congress ought to be held than the suspicion 
that our views are influenced by pecuniary interests. 

Precisely the same campaign as that of Mr. Tavenner was carried 
on in 1913 and 1914 by the National Peace Council in London.’ A 
man by the name of Perris wrote a pamphlet called “ The war 
traders,” and a particularly irresponsible socialist member of Parlia¬ 
ment named Philip Snowden (by the way, his wife is in the Ford 
peace party), in conjunction with Perris, spread broadcast just 
such material as is set forth in Mr. Tavenner’s charges. The result 
in England, as you know, has been all too painful. Let us hope 
that we may be spared a fatuousness which has cost Great Britain 
so many noble young lives. 

The Chairman. Snowden is a member of what—House of Com¬ 
mons? 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


7 


Mr. Gardner. Yes. 

The Chairman. You have finished your remarks? 

Mr. Gardner. I have finished all I want to say, sir. 

The Chairman. Do any members of the committee wish to ask 
Mr. Gardner a question ? 

Mr. Bennet. I would like to ask him, more or less in the way of 
an assertion, You do not think there are any Members in this House, 
where you have served, believe that your character needs any vin¬ 
dication ? 

Mr. Gardner. Not within the four walls of this House; I hope not. 
Thank you very much for saying that; but I get it so much in my 
clippings—by implication or otherwise. I even had an editorial 
in my own district which implied that Theodore Boosevelt and I were 
both bought by ammunition makers. That was in my own district. 
It is fair to say there is no question about what the writer’s motive 
was. I know who the man was, and the editor happened to be 
absent, and he was one of the subeditors; but I simply mention that 
as a fact. 

About that sort of thing a man feels, after a time, just exactly 
as Boosevelt felt about the stories that he was getting drunk all 
the time—that there had got to be something done about it. 

Mr. Chipereield. Mr. Gardner, what is the ultimate object of 
this investigation, if you will allow me to ask that question? 

Mr. Gardner. What investigation—the about “smothering”- 

Mr. Chiperfield. The proposed investigation by these resolu¬ 
tions ? 

Mr. Gardner. Yes. 

Mr. Chiperfield. I have noticed, with some curiosity and a 
little indignation, the attacks that have been made upon these 
various bodies. I am frank to say there has been some indifference 
on my part whether or not they are true. It occurs to me that it 
is aimed at the preparedness program. How does it throw any 
light upon the question one way or another if the Navy League, 
and the Labor’s National Peace Council, and National Security 
League, and the American Defense Society, and so forth, have an 
ulterior purpose, one way or the other ? How does it affect the duty 
of Congress to meet the question absolutely independently of the 
suggestions of these bodies, and to perform the duty that is past 
upon Congress, should be sustained, or, on the other hand, should 
they be convicted upon the charges made—how would it ultimately 
affect the question? 

Mr. Gardner. You mean to say: “If you are hungry, what 
difference does it make whether the hands that bring you the food 
are dirty or not ? ” 

Mr. Chiperfield. I mean to say nothing of the sort. I mean to 
say that there is a duty imposed upon this Congress, without regard 
to whether some who are interested in the propaganda may have 
soiled hands, or whether their hands are clean. 

Mr. Gardner. That is precisely what I said. 

Mr. Chiperfield. That is what I mean. 

Mr. Gardner. That is precisely the question I asked you, whether 
you did mean that. 

Mr. Chiperfield. I do mean that. 


8 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


Mr. Gardner. Let me answer you, Mr. Chiperfield. Of course, 
this resolution of mine is a “ put-up ” or “ shut-up ” resolution. I do 
not pretend it is anything else. Does that answer you ? 

The Chairman. Here is a question I was about to ask. 

Mr. Chiperfield. So far as the societies are concerned, it does 
answer it, but should it, even though the charges are true, affect us 
one wav or the other ? 

Mr. Gardner. I have said, “ Put me in jail, if you just think I am 
being corrupt.” I have said that publicly in an article aimed, I think, 
against Mr. Daniels. If we are corrupted by the ammunition makers 
put us in jail, but answer what we say.” 

The Chairman. Is there any suggestion in the press or otherwise 
that these organization are endeavoring to use money or undue in¬ 
fluence to get legislation through Congress ? 

Mr. Gardner. I have heard that intimation made continually on 
the floor of this House and in the press and everywhere else—you 
mean used directly on Congressmen ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Gardner. I have not heard that, Mr. Henry. Hamilton Holt 
made that statement with regard to a Senator. 

The Chairman. Is there supposed to be, from these reports, a 
lobby here in Washington using any undue influence, either by the 
use of money or otherwise ? 

Mr. Gardner. I think so. I think I have had a request from some 
newspaper for an interview, in which they spoke of the steel-plate 
lobby—no; the munitions lobby and the armor-plate trust in Con¬ 
gress. In fact, I rather think a gentleman right here has been 
making some such statements in New York. I had an account of the 
meeting. I think I can submit tangible evidence that that has been 
intimated by a Member of Congress. 

The Chairman. The lobby committee of the Senate is still in 
existence, the Senate is a continuing body. 

Mr. Gardner. I do not know. Of course, they never found out 
anything. 

The Chairman. About some things they did. 

Mr. Gardner. I rather think that the conclusion was that one 
Member of Congress had been under some kind of suspicion of hav¬ 
ing been in with- 

The Chairman. The Senate lobby ? 

Mr. Gardner. They never found out anything. That was the 
committee instituted in consequence of the President declaring there 
was a lobby here interested in the tariff schedules. That committee 
never found anything. That is a useless committee. This one of 
the House did find out something. 

The Chairman. Mr. Garrett was the chairman. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Just in order that I may make my position 
clear, since I have asked the question of Mr. Gardner. For one in 
the language of the street, I am extremely “ weary ” of the propa¬ 
ganda that has been carried on impugning the motives of every man 
who is in favor of national preparedness by asserting there was 
somebody who would profit by such an enactment into law. 

The question which I wanted to make plain is this: Is it worth our 
while to dignify the charges that have been made by entering upon 
an investigation of this kind, when, even though there were some who 
might be financially interested outside of any official duty and dis- 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


9 


connected entirely with this House—is it a thing that would reflect 
upon such a law or proposed law, even though that were true, or 
would it be an argument in its favor, even, if the reverse was true? 
That is the only question suggested, and that is what I meant by my 
question to Congressman Gardner. 

Mr. Gardner. And I meant by my answer to quite agree with you 
in that point of vieAv. What I asked you was whether you thought it 
affected the question of whether a man’s hands were dirty or not, 
when lie brought you a plate of food, provided he was relieving your 
starvation. 

Mr. Chiperfield. So far as my personal appetite is concerned, I 
suppose it would make no difference. But the same argument would 
destroy any religion—there are pretenders and hypocrites and those 
who have ulterior motives in every movement. 

Mr. Gardner. If these organizations are doing it for their own 
ulterior ends, why, then it discredits all the facts and statements 
that they put forward before the community. That is just the reason 
I want Mr. Tavenner and myself investigated, to see whether we are 
making any money, because that would discredit the statements we 
have put before the community. 

Mr. Bennet. You have not before suggested Mr. Tavenner. 

Mr. Gardner. I thought I did in my personal letter to Mr. Taven¬ 
ner. 

The Chairman. Just a question, Mr. Gardner. The purpose of 
these organizations is, directly or indirectly, properly or improperly, 
to influence the action of Congress. That is the ultimate object upon 
this question of preparedness ? 

Mr. Gardner. The Congress—I think more especially the public. 

The Chairman. That would be indirectly upon Congress; that is 
what I meant by “ indirectly.” 

Mr. Gardner. Yes; I think that is true, perhaps. That is cer¬ 
tainly true of the Navy League and the National Security League 
and the American Defense Society. Whether the Labor’s National 
Peace Council is trying to influence Congress or the President di¬ 
rectly or to influence labor organizations, that I do not know. 

The Chairman. If an investigation was had, and a committee 
should ascertain that these organizations that you now speak of did 
have an ulterior purpose, do you not think the action of Congress 
might be different than it would be without such investigation? 

Mr. Gardner. I do not know. I am not going into that. 

The Chairman. I would like them to put the other side, that if 
as a result of such investigation it was found that there was any 
such ulterior purpose, do you not think it would have an effect upon 
Congress, or at least might have? 

Mr. Gardner. A beneficial effect? 

The Chairman. Upon the minds of the Members as to the ultimate 
action that was taken? 

Mr. Gardner. In this way, you know perfectly well that when you 
have not got a good case before the bar you slang the opposing 
counsel. Now, if that opposing counsel can successfully show that 
you are slanging him, he completely breaks down your case. 

The Chairman. Was that all, Mr. Gardner? 

Mr. Gardner. That is all. 

The Chairman. The committee will now hear Mr. Tavenner. 


10 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


STATEMENT OF HON. CLYDE H. TAVENNER, MEMBER OF CON¬ 
GRESS FROM ILLINOIS. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, 
I am very anxious to see an investigation by Congress, but, as Mr. 
Chiperfield says, even after you investigate the four organizations 
that are named in Mr. Gardner’s resolution and in Mr. Hensley’s reso¬ 
lution, you would then have only arrived at the point where you 
ought to start to investigate. I realize that what the Navy League 
is or is not is not very important, so far as the subject of defense is 
concerned. The important thing is this, that $240,000,000, raised 
by taxing the things that the people eat, wear, and use, have been 
expended annually on the Army and Navy, and that now, it is said, 
we are “ pitifully unprepared,” and that “ if war were to break out 
to-day, it would be found that our coast defenses have not sufficient 
ammunition for an hour’s fight.” 

It seems to me the thing we really ought to investigate is the 
question as to where all these millions of dollars have gone, the cir¬ 
cumstances under which contracts have been made by Army officers 
with private munitions firms, and the prices that we have paid for 
armor and munitions of war. The public service that would result 
from that kind of an investigation, in my opinion, would be this: 
We could profit by the mistakes that have been made in the past. If 
we are not prepared after spending $240,000,000 a year, what reason 
is there to believe that we would be prepared if we spend $340,000,000 
a year? 

So far as my motives are concerned, I wish to say this: I have 
not made a single dollar of profit out of my campaign for Govern¬ 
ment manufacture of munitions. 

Mr. Gardner suggested that both he and I be investigated. I am 
perfectly willing to be investigated, and I wish to make this state¬ 
ment right here now, that I am at the service of any gentleman who 
desires to question me further on the matter, any gentlemen in this 
room, any member of the committee, or anyone else. I have not made 
one penny of profit from any source whatsoever, neither from any 
writings of newspaper articles, or from any lectures or from any 
other source. I do not belong to any organization; I am not affiliated 
with any organization, and I report to no one and take orders from 
no one, except my constituents. I have gone as far as New York 
from Illinois to make speeches on the proposition of Government 
manufacture of munitions of war, and I have paid my own expenses; 
not only my own car fare but my own hotel bills. However. I do 
not wish to be understood as meaning that I deserve any credit on 
account of not having my expenses paid when I have traveled about 
making speeches for Government manufacture; I am just stating 
the fact that my expenses v r ere not paid. No one ever offered to pay 
them. I am not criticising any Member of Congress who has been 
paid for speaking. Members are constantly receiving requests to go 
to various cities and deliver addresses, and they can not afford to 
make this practice unless they receive some compensation. After 
making several trips and not receiving expenses or compensation I 
have quit accepting invitations to speak, as I find it too expensive 
a luxury for me to indulge in. 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


11 


I repeat, I have not made a single penny of profit out of this cam¬ 
paign from any source, and the minute any gentleman shows I have, 
I will resign my seat in Congress. I now put myself at the disposal 
of the gentleman from Massachusetts to ask me any questions he de¬ 
sires as to whether I have made one penny of profit from any source. 
If he desires to ask me any question, I will be glad to answer him. 

Mr. Gardner. Did you address that to me ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gardner. I simply say that both sides ought to be investi¬ 
gated. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would consider it a luxury to be investigated. 

Mr. Gardner. And see whether you write letters for the news¬ 
papers. 


Mr. Tavenner. I have not written any articles for pay for a year 
and & half, or about that time. I have discontinued my newspaper 
service. I used to conduct a newspaper bureau and wrote an article 
every day from Washington for six or eight years. I wrote those 
articles for the pay the papers gave me, and they paid just enough 
to enable me to live. 

Mr. Gardner. I take absolutely your word for that as sufficiently 
convincing. 

Mr. Tavenner. It is a question of facts. What we ought to do is 
this: We ought to find out what Members of Congress own stock in 
war trafficking firms. It is not a question of establishing motive, but 
of fact. Let the people know the facts, and if it is all right for Mem¬ 
bers of Congress to own stock in the munitions firms, they can get out 
among their constituents and say, “Vote for me! I own stock in 
such and such munitions concerns! Is not this fact an indorsement 
of my candidacy ? ” If there is nothing wrong about it, perhaps 
their majorities will be increased. In any event, w y e should let the 
people know the facts. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Mr. Tavenner, may I inquire whether you have 
carried on campaigns about the present status of war contracts? 

Mr. Tavenner. I am fighting for Government manufacture of 
munitions. 

Mr. Chiperfield. And I would judge that had been a source of 
considerable expense to you? 

Mr. Tavenner. It has. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Has that all been met privately ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes. I have used too much of my salary, more 
than I could really afford. I have no income except what I draw 
from the House of Representatives as a Member. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Has that all been paid from your own private 
funds ? 

Mr. Tavenner. From my salary which I receive as a member of 
the House of Representatives. It has not been so very expensive, 
however, for the reason that I have my clerk, as a Member of Con¬ 
gress, and I can send out extracts from my remarks in the Con¬ 
gressional Record at very little cost. Before I sent out these extracts 
to the newspapers I made up a sample and submitted it to the Post 
Office Department, asking, “ Is it all right for me to mail this matter 
under my frank? ” They replied, “ It is absolutely all right to frank 
that. All you must state is that the matter is from the Congressional 
Record, extracts from remarks, etc.” 


12 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


I want to see an investigation, but 1 want this matter inquired 
into: Why we are paying from 20 to 60 per cent more for millions 
of dollars worth of munitions, armor, etc., than we can manufacture 
them for in the Government arsenals and navy yards. I realize there 
are two sides to this policy, and an investigation would bring out 
both sides. I am not afraid to have the argument of the other side 
heard, and then I want to have the argument in favor of Govern¬ 
ment manufacture heard. 

As soon as the House convenes to-day I shall introduce a resolu¬ 
tion asking -for the appointment of a committee to investigate a 
number of matters of great importance. 

I realize the Navy League is only a side issue. My statement about 
the Navy League was not that these men were not inspired by lofty 
motives, but that they owned stock in war trafficking firms; that the 
founders of the league were such, and I believe an investigation 
would reveal that the Navy League originated at 23 Wall Street, 
in the office of J. P. Morgan & Co. The reason I believe that- 

The Chairman. You mean to say that in your resolution you will 
charge that Members of Congress and Senators own stock in muni¬ 
tion-trafficking concerns? 

Mr. Tavenner. There was an investigation in 1914-15 by a com¬ 
mittee of the United States Senate into lobbies, and two Members 
of the Senate testified, under oath, that they owned stock in such 
concerns; others that their relatives owned stock. 

The Chairman. You want to broaden this resolution? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir; I want to broaden this resolution to take 
in everything, because I realize nothing would be gained by the pub¬ 
lic if we investigated only the unimportant part. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Are those Senators present Members of the 
Senate ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir; they are Senators now. 

Mr. Gardner. Did you ask what the stock was they owned? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir; the stock was that of the General Electric 
Co. and the United States Steel Corporation. The General Electric 
Co. has drawn dow T n two and one-half millions of dollars worth of 
contracts from the Navy Department, receiving orders every year, 
and it is reported in the Standard Corporation Service Reports as 
having profited hugely from the European War, and it is so reported 
in the Wall Street journal and in Financial America. They all 
have it down as a war trader. 

I think the orders from the United States Government were re¬ 
ceived during the time Senators held stock. If not, let us ascertain 
when they bought the stock, how long they held it, and all about it. 

Mr. Gardner. But the other orders? 

Mr. Tavenner. From these various countries? 

Mr. Gardner. Yes. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would not be surprised if there had been some 
withdrawals since the European war. 

Mr. Gardner. The General Electric Co. is in my county. I sold 
out my stock. [Note.— Jan. 22, 1916.—I am a trustee of certain 
trusts containing General Electric shares. My wife is a small bene¬ 
ficiary and my married daughter is a substantial beneficiary.] 

Mr. Tavenner. Did you sell out your stock before General Electric 
received contracts from the Navy Department? 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


13 


Mr. Gardner. I never heard until this minute of any contracts 
with the Navy Department. That is the trouble; a man makes in¬ 
vestments and he can not go into everything, but I got rid of my 
General Electric Co. stock when I found out that they had contracts 
to make munitions. 

Mr. Tavenner. I would like to ask you what relation George 
Peabody Gardner is to you? 

Mr. Gardner. He is a first cousin. 

Mr. Tavenner. He is a director in the General Electric Co., which 
is a J. P. Morgan concern; is not that correct ? 

Mr. Gardner. Yes. 

The Chairman. You have called these matters to the attention of 
the Committees on Naval Affairs and Military Affairs and asked 
them to make inquiry? 

Mr. Tavenner. No; because I thought the proper way to do this 
would be by a special joint committee of Congress. 

The Chairman. Those committees w T ould have jurisdiction even 
now to inquire into the expenditure of money which we are appro¬ 
priating in Congress for the Army and Navy. 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir; but I want investigated some other things 
of a nature that they probably would not feel like going into. 

I want certain Wall Street brokers to testify and give names of 
patrons who are Army and Navy officers. 

The Chairman. Are you going to specify those things in your 
resolution ? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. I want to find out by what authority 
secret plans and specifications worked out by officers and employees 
of the Navy Department were turned over to a private firm, for use 
in foreign battleships, and I have- 

Mr. Ciiiperfield. Do you know that to be true? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir; I do. 

Mr. Foster. Did you ever place that before the Navy Department? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir; the Navy Department knows about it. 
I have here a copy of the resolution which I shall introduce to-day. 
I will read it. 

Mr. Foster. I do not think that will be necessary, if you are going 
to introduce it. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Have you informed the War and Navy Depart¬ 
ments of that fact? 

Mr. Tavenner. They know it. 

Mr. Bennet. Is that relation to the fire-control plans sold to the 
Greek Government? 

Mr. Tavenner. No, sir; to the Argentine Government. 

Mr. Lenroot. Mr. Tavenner, is it your opinion that an investiga¬ 
tion as proposed in this resolution before the committee now would 
be of public benefit or benefit with reference to action of Congress? 

Mr. Tavenner. I believe it would. I believe the people ought 
to know all about the identity of the gentlemen who founded the 
Navy League. 

Mr. Garrett. I would be very glad to have Mr. Tavenner read 
the resolution that he is going to introduce. 

The Chairman. I must be on the floor at 12 o’clock. 

Mr. Garrett. You would not be able to read it in five minutes? 

Mr. Tavenner. I can read it in five minutes. 



14 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


Mr. Garrett. Read it, as rapidly as possible. 

Mr. Tavenner (reading) : 

Whereas more than $200,000,000, raised principally by taxing the things that 
the people eat, wear, and use, have been expended annually on the Army 
and Navy under the general assumption that in return for this colossal 
expenditure the Nation was being reasonably “ prepared ” ; and 
Whereas it is now being generally asserted in many quarters that the Nation is 
pitifully “ unprepared,” the specific charge having been made on the floor of 
the House of Representatives by a Member thereof that “ if war were to 
break out to-day, it would be found that our coast defenses have not sufficient 
ammunition for an hour’s fight ” ; and 

Whereas it has also been charged in the Congress that millions of dollars of 
public funds have been wasted by the payment to private manufacturers by 
Army and Navy officers of from 20 to 60 per cent more for large quantities 
of Army and Navy supplies than the same could have been obtained for 
through their manufacture in Government arsenals and navy yards; and 
Whereas President Wilson in a message to the Congress on December 8, 1914, 
said that “ like good stewards, we should so account for every dollar of our 
appropriations as to make it perfectly evident what it was spent for and in 
what way it was spent ” ; and 

Whereas the profit incident to the manufacture and sale of arms, armament, 
and munitions of war has a tendency to corrupt public opinion, disturb inter¬ 
national peace, and prevent a peaceful settlement of disputes between na¬ 
tions ; and inasmuch as it ought to be made impossible for any person or 
corporation to make money out of war; and inasmuch as the Government 
should, for its own safety and protection, manufacture all arms, armament, 
and munitions of war for the equipment, construction, and use of the Army 
and Navy to the end that it may be independent of individuals and corporate 
interests; and 

Whereas there has been public criticism of the action of ex-Army and ex- 
Navy officers, who after resigning or retiring have taken employment with 
concerns having dealings with the Government; and 
Whereas it has been charged that supposedly secret plans and designs worked 
out by officers and employees of the Navy Department at public expense 
for exclusive use in American battleships were furnished to a private firm 
to be embodied in battleships for another nation; and 
Whereas it has been charged that the Navy League, an organization active 
in agitating for increased naval expenditures has among its founders, officers, 
members, and directors persons who are, or have been officers, directors, or 
stockholders of war-trafficking firms or concerns which stand to profit 
financially from the increased naval appropriations being agitated by said 
Navy League; and 

Whereas hearings by the Lobby Investigation Committee of the United States 
Senate in 1915 revealed that Senators now in office were stockholders of 
war-trafficking firms and concerns which profit financially from Government 
appropriations for the Army and Navy; and 
Whereas any or all of the divers matters heretofore mentioned may bear on 
the alleged wasting of public funds and the alleged unpreparedness of our 
Nation in spite of the enormous appropriations made by Congress annually; 
and 

Whereas it is deemed advisable to gather the facts bearing on the aforesaid 
conditions and charges, or in any way or manner relating thereto or to any 
of the subjects above mentioned, as a basis for remedial and other legis¬ 
lative purposes: Therefore be it 

Resolved , That a joint committee of the Senate and House of Representa¬ 
tives, to consist of six Members of the Senate to be appointed by the President 
of the Senate, and six Members of the House of Representatives to be appointed 

by the Speaker of the House, is hereby empowered, authorized, and directed_ 

First. To investigate fully and inquire into each and all of the above-recited 
matters and into any matters and subjects connected with, or appurtenant to 
or being upon the same. 

Second. To investigate fully and inquire into— 

(n) The total amounts paid to private manufacturers for guns, ammunition 
torpedoes, powder, armor plate, submarines, battleships, and other equipment 
and supplies used by the Army and Navy in large quantities for each vear 
since 1887, and approximately what the saving would have been to the people 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


15 


if the capacity of Government establishments had permitted the complete Gov¬ 
ernment manufacture of said equipment. 

The ext ? nt of * he economy or extravagance which has resulted from 
the Government manufacture of Army and Navy equipment of any kind what- 
soever which the Government is now engaged in manufacturing. 

(c) The most feasible plan of acquiring or constructing manufacturing plants 
o sufficient capacity to supply the Army and Navy with all arms, armament, 
and munitions of war, including ships and their equipment. 

(d) The probable cost of such manufacturing plants, taking into account both 
present and future military needs. 

( e ) The proper locations for such manufacturing plants. 

(/) The necessary legislation to prevent either persons or corporations from 
engaging or continuing in such manufacture and when such legislation should 
take effect. 

Third. To investigate and report the extent to which Army and Navy officials 
on the retired list, or who have resigned from the Army and Navv, are now 
connected or have ever been connected with concerns having dealings with the 
Government. 

(a) Or to investigate any alleged connections, direct or indirect, between 
any Army or Navy officer, either on the active list or the retired list, and 
concerns which now have or have had dealings with the Government. 

(&) Whether any Army or Navy officers on the pay roll -of the Government, 
either on the active or retired list, are now, or have been, in any contract by 
which they are, or were, to receive royalties on implements of war sold to foreign 
governments. 

Fourth. To compile a list of ex-Army and ex-Navy officers employed by private 
concerns and the names, places, and character of the business engaged in by the 
concerns with which said persons are, or have been, connected. 

Fifth. To investigate and report the circumstances under which any private 
concern has been able to obtain plans and specifications from the Navy Depart¬ 
ment for use in constructing battleships for a foreign nation. 

Sixth. To investigate the quality of work of any character supplied the Gov¬ 


ernment by private concerns or the circumstances involved in connection with 
the making of any contracts between the Government and any private concern. 

Seventh. To ascertain the extent to which individuals who are, or who have 
been, founders, directors, officers, life members, or contributing members of the 
Navy League or similar organizations, are, or have been, stockholders, officers, 
directors, or employees of concerns which stand to profit from the increased 
appropriations for the Army and Navy which are being advocated by the Navy 
League or kindred organizations. 

Eighth. To inquire into the organization, membership, expeditures, receipts, 
and sources thereof of Labor’s National Peace Council, or any organizations 
which have been active in the propaganda for or against an embargo on muni¬ 
tions of war or the proposed increases in the Army and Navy of the United 


States. 


Ninth. To ascertain the extent to which Members of Congress both of the 
Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, own, hold, or con¬ 
trol, directly or indirectly, or have ever owned, held, or controlled, directly or 
indirectly, at any time during their membership in this or any preceding Con¬ 
gress, stock or bonds in any concern or concerns which are now, or have been 
engaged in the manufacture of munitions of war. 

Tenth. To ascertain the extent to which Members of Congress, both of the 
Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, own, hold, or con¬ 
trol, directly or indirectly, or have ever owned, held, or controlled, directly or 
indirectly, at any time during their membership in this or any preceding Con¬ 
fess, stock or bonds in any concern or concerns which have profited financially 
by virtue of contracts for munitions, armament, ships, or other supplies or 
materials, under moneys appropriated in the Army, Navy, fortifications, sundry 
civil, or other appropriation bills, or, if deemed advisable, to require Army 
and Navy officers, or any person or persons who have taken an active part for 
or against increased Army and Navy appropriations, to testify as to their 
holdings of stocks and bonds. 

Eleventh. To require munitions concerns or firms which have obtained con¬ 
tracts for materials of any character under Army and Navy appropriations, 
to furnish sworn lists of its stockholders and bondholders on June 30, 1914, 
June 30, 1915, or such other dates as it may designate, or to require stock 
brokers to furnish lists of these for whom they have bought or sold stocks or 
bonds. 


16 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


That said joint committee he authorized to take testimony, have the power 
to administer oaths, and to send for persons and papers, and to compel wit¬ 
nesses to attend and testify, and to report at the earliest practicable date, 01 zo 
make partial reports at intervals of time during the course of proceedings it m 
the judgment of the committee such action appears advisable, and be autiioi i/ea 
to sit by subcommittee or otherwise during the sessions or recess of Congress, 
at such times and places as it may deem advisable, and to employ such clerical 
and stenographic assistance as it shall deem necessary; to order such piloting 
and binding done as may be required in the transaction of its business, and to 
incur such expenses as may be deemed necessary, all such expense to be paid 
in equal proportions out of the contingent funds of the Senate and House of 
Representatives upon vouchers signed by the chairman of the committee, and 
approved by the proper committee of each house. And that the hearings of this 
committee he open to the public. 

Provided, That any member of the House or Senate who is in this, or has 
been in any preceding Congress, a member of the Military Affairs, Naval, or the 
Appropriations Comittee of the House or Senate or who has held, owned, or 
controlled, directly or indirectly, during this or any preceding Congress, any 
stock or bonds in concerns which have profited under Army and Navy appropria¬ 
tions, or whose relatives, either by blood or marriage have held, owned, or con¬ 
trolled, directly or indirectly, bonds or stock in such concerns, shall not be 
eligible for appointment on committee herein provided for. 

[Note. —January 27, 1916, the above resolution was introduced; January 
19, 1916, numbered H. J. Res. 112, and was referred to the Committee on Naval 
Affairs, and ordered to be printed.] 

Mr. Gardner. I do not think I said half an hour, if you mean me. 
I said 73 per cent of an hour, if you will look up my hearing. 

You meant me, about that half hour’s ammunition? 

Mr. Tavenner. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Gardner. I think you will see that I said 73 per cent of an 
hour. 

Mr. Tavenner. Mr. Gardner, I believe I quoted that from the 
Congressional Record. If I made a mistake, I will be glad to cor¬ 
rect it. 

[Note (by Mr. Tavenner, Jan. 27, 1916).—The remarks in question were taken 
from Mr. Gardner’s speech before the House of Representatives on December 
10, 1914, which were as follows: “ I do not, however, hesitate to assert that 
if war were to break out to-day, it would be found that our coast defenses 
have not sufficient ammunition for an hour's fight." (See Congressional Rec¬ 
ord, p. 100, pt. 1, vol. 52.) ] 

Mr. Gardner. Gen. Wotherspoon’s report showed three-quarters 
of an hour’s ammunition for the sea-coast guns and one-half of an 
hour’s ammunition for the sea-coast mortars. That proved to be a 
mistake. We had 73 per cent of one hour’s ammunition for the guns 
and mortars combined. 

Mr. Tavenner. I desire to add this, that while I do not agree with 
Mr. Gardner on everything, and am unwilling to go to anything like 
the length he would have us go, I realize he has given much pains¬ 
taking study, time, and energy to the work of educating himself on 
matters pertaining to the Army and Navy. I believe his work on 
the whole will be beneficial for this reason; I am satisfied in my own 
mind that millions and millions of dollars appropriated for defense 
have been wasted by the payment of excessive prices for materials of 
various kinds. I believe that the Nation does not have the Army 
and Navy it should have for the colossal sums that have been ex¬ 
pended upon them. Mr. Gardner has called attention to certain 
weaknesses in our defenses, and they will be corrected. In the 
meantime the eyes of Congress and the people are being opened to 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


17 


the fact that they have not been receiving a dollar’s worth of defense 
for every dollar appropriated. I believe the result will be that 
public sentiment will ultimately force Congress to manufacture its 
own munitions, armor, battleships, submarines, etc. I expect legis¬ 
lation looking to this end to be enacted even in the present session of 
Congress. Once private profit and private graft are taken out of 
war and preparation for war, I am confident that that part of the 
systematic agitation for increased Army and Navy appropriations 
that is bought and paid for will cease overnight, and that the now- 
threatening danger of a military autocracy in this country will 
completely vanish. 

Relative to the identit}^ of the founders of the Navy League, I 
will add for publication in the records of this hearing, so the mem¬ 
bers of the committee may have it in shape for consideration, some 
extracts from my remarks in the House of Representatives on Decem¬ 
ber 15, 1915, bearing on that subject : 

THE DISINTERESTED PATRIOTISM OF THE NAVY LEAGUE. 

Mr. Tavenner. I believe in giving credit to whom credit is due. For in¬ 
stance, the gentlemen back of the Navy League, in my opinion, deserve full 
credit for the sentiment that has at last been developed in many quarters of 
the United States for increased appropriations for the Army and Navy. They 
deserve full credit for the sentiment that has been aroused in the large manu¬ 
facturing centers and other parts of the United States for the proposed $500,- 
000.000 bond issue for battleships that the Navy League has been advocating. 

I am in favor of giving the Navy League full credit and also full responsibility. 

On November 19 I made the statement, publicly, that I intended to introduce 
in Congress a resolution to investigate the Navy League and to require .T. P. 
Morgan, one of the directors of the league, to take the responsibility of testify¬ 
ing under oath as to whether he is interested in war-trafficking firms. 

******* 

In a letter sent to Members of Congress, dated January 13, 1914, A. H. 
Da dm un, secretary of the Navy League, said: 

“ Certain Congressmen have insinuated that the league is supported by people 
who are interested in the sale of war materials to the Navy. They are entirely 
mistaken.” 

Mr. Dadmun, in a letter published in the January, 1916, issue of Pearson’s 
Magazine, reiterates that the men back of the Navy League “ are men who will 
not profit by the results of the league's propaganda .” 

What is this Navy League? Who founded it, and who are its directors? I 
hold in my hand the bound Navy League Journal for 1904. In the opening 
number is the statement that this is “ the official organ of the Navy League ot 
the United States.” 

I turn now to page 32 of the issue of February, 1904, where I find a list of 
19 men who are named as the “ founders ” of the Navy League. Now, then, 
let us see who they are. 

I note in the list of founders the name of the Midvale Steel Co. The United 
States Government since 1903 lias bought from the Midvale Steel Co. 48,399 
tons of armor, and we have paid for it an average of $420 a ton, or in all 
$20,375,858 for the single item of armor plate alone, not to say anything about 
other millions of dollars’ worth of contracts that have been given to the Mid¬ 
vale Steel Co. for other things used by the Army and Navy; and if the Navy 
League’s proposed $500,000,000 bond issue goes through, Midvale will stand to 
draw down some more millions. 

Let us see if there are any more war traffickers here. Is Charles M. Schwab* 
whom I see listed as one of the founders, a war trafficker? Well, he is presi¬ 
dent of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, and we have bought from Bethlehem 
95 007 tons of armor at an average rate of $445 a ton. and have paid Bethlehem 
for armor plate alone $42,344,937. That is the second member of the armor 
ring. 


25582—16 


9 



18 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


Now, there is another member of the armor ring, and that is the Carnegie 
Steel Co. Let us see if we find them also among the founders of the Navy 
League. Yes; I see here the name of J. 1*. Morgan. The late J. P. Morgan 
was the organizer and a director of the United States Steel Corporation, which 
controls, according to Moody’s Manual, the Carnegie Steel Co. We have bought 
from the Carnegie Steel Co. 89,993 tons of armor plate, paying an average of 
$442 a ton, or a total of $39,783,497 for the single item of armor plate; and if 
the Navy League’s proposed $500,000,000 bond issue for battleships goes 
through they will receive still larger contracts. So that you see the three 
firms which have a monopoly of the manufacture of armor in this country are 
all founders of the Navy League; they are all represented as the founders of 
the Navy League, and we have bought from them 233,339 tons of armor plate, 
paying for it an average of $439 a ton, or a total of $102,504,292. 

Mr. Fare. For how long? 

Mr. Tavenner. Since 1887. Remember that figure, $439! There have been 
10 official estimates by Government officials as to the cost of armor plate in a 
Government factory, and the average of those estimates is $251 a ton; and had 
we manufactured this armor in a Government factory, which the Navy League 
has cold-shouldered, I think I am well within the bounds of conservatism when 
I say we could have saved to the American taxpayers at the very least 
$35,000,000. 

ARMOR-PLATE MAKERS ARE THE MOST PATRIOTIC PATRIOTS ON EARTH. 

There are but three firms in the United States that manufacture armor 
plate—-Midvale, Bethlehem, and Carnegie companies—and each of them is 
represented in the list of 19 men who, according to the official journal of the 
Navy League, were the founders of the organization. 

At the time this particular list of 19 founders of the Navy League was pub¬ 
lished there were some 80,000,000 or 90,000,000 ordinary individuals and thou¬ 
sands of directors of corporations in the United States. 

Is it not a rather peculiar coincidence that among those 19 patriots who 
stepped forth from all the millions of American citizens to save the Republic 
by advocating larger appropriations for battleships, every armor-making con¬ 
cern in the United States should be represented? And that the greater half 
of the 19 patriots were connected with firms that would directly profit from 
such propaganda? And that most of those who were not directly concerned 
with such firms were connected in some manner with individuals or firms that 
would profit? To expect the intelligent men and women of this country to 
agree with the Navy League officials that this was not a peculiar coincidence 
is to assume that the American people are fools. 

Or can it be that we are mistaken, and that the explanation of the presence 
of so many war traffickers among the founders of the Navy League is that 
patriotism just naturally runs to armor-plate makers? If the personnel of 
the Navy League is a thermometer registering the quantity and quality of the 
patriotism of an individual, then it can not be successfully denied that patriot¬ 
ism does run to the armor-plate makers. 

And standing shoulder to shoulder in patriotism with the directors and stock¬ 
holders of armor-plate-making concerns are the directors and stockholders of 
steel, and then of nickel, and copper, and zinc, and so on down the line. As 
we proceed to analyze the various groups of founders, life members, honorary 
vice presidents, and contributors to the Navy League covering its entire exist¬ 
ence of 13 years the conviction will be gradually driven home to us that patriot¬ 
ism runs to metal, and that the Navy League is the magnet which draws to¬ 
gether the men who make money handling metal in some form or other and 
who want to make more money. After these basic facts are clearly established 
in our minds it will not appear strange, but quite the logical thing, that our 
friend, Col. Robert M. Thompson, the president of the New York Metal Ex¬ 
change, should be the president of the Navy League. 

Col. Thompson might have been a founder of an Army league, or a State 
militia league, or a national militia league, but he was not. He is the chair¬ 
man of the board of directors of the Nickel Trust, and nickel is the most im¬ 
portant and most expensive metal that goes into armor plate, and armor plate 
is one of the most important and most expensive things that go into a dread- 
naught, and Col. Thompson became a founder of the Navy League. He has 
been one of the most active heads of the Navy League ever since. By a coin¬ 
cidence that is almost weird, nickel, that valuable metal which is so* indis- 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


19 


pensable in war trafficking, has also always been well to the forefront in the 
makeup o ftlie Navy League of Great. Britain. For many years Sir Alfred 
Mond, chairman of the Mond Nickel Co. of London, has been the vice-president 
of the British Navy League. 

♦ H* % 

The Harvey Steel Co., which owned the patent on a process for hardening 
steel which compelled all manufacturers of armor plate to pay it a royalty, 
was in on the ground floor at the organization of the Navy League in the per¬ 
sons of S. S. Palmer, its president, and Benjamin F. Tracy, ex-Secretary of the 
Navy. Nil*. Tracy was the counsel for the Harvey Co. and the Carnegie Steel 
Co. after leaving the Navy Department. Both Palmer and Tracy were also 
among the 19 founders. 

Throughout the existence of the Navy League there have been several distinct 
groups represented, made up of officers, directors, attorneys, and employees. 
The most important of these are the J. P. Morgan group, the Bethlehem Steel 
group, the Carnegie Steel group, the Midvale Steel group, the Harvey Steel 
group, and last, but not least, Col. Thompson’s International Nickel Co. group. 
These groups will be found well represented in the league’s officers, directorates, 
contributors, and vice presidents for each and every years since the birth of 
the Navy League in 1902. 

There are 19 men in the list of founders, and of those 19 the majority were 
connected with concerns and establishments which, through interlocking 
directorates, connect in turn with manufacturers of war materials and things 
which go into war materials. 

Now I come down to the officers of the Navy League to-day. The president 
of the league, Col. Robert M. Thompson, the gentleman who was unkind enough 
to threaten to sue me but not kind enough to do it [applause on the Democratic 
side], is chairman of the board of directors of the International Nickel Co., 
the business of which, according to the Wall Street Journal, has been very 
much improved by the war. 

The directorate of the International Nickel Co. interlocks with that of the 
United States Steel Corporation, Edmund C. Converse sitting as a director on 
both concerns. United States Steel controls the bulk of the steel industry in 
this country, and is capitalized for $1,512,000,000, while International Nickel 
controls the greater part of the nickel lands of the North American Continent, 
and is capitalized at $47,000,000. 

Col. Thompson, as president of the Navy League, was a happy selection, 
indeed, because the steel, nickel, and copper interests, all of which will profit 
handsomely through war and preparation for war, interlock beautifully through 
him and his International Nickel Co. W. A. Clark, the Montana “copper king,” 
is president of the Waclark Wire Co., and Col. Thompson is one of his directors 
' on that corporation. Then, too, Col. Thompson is president of the New York 
Metal Exchange. 

Col. Thompson’s International Nickel Co. also interlocks with the Midvale 
Steel & Ordnance Co., W. E. Corey being a director of International Nickel and 
president and director of the new Midvale corporation, which was organized 
recently for $100,000,000 especially to handle the growing war-trafficking trade, 
and is one of the largest war-trading firms in the United States. Mr. Corey 
only recently retired from the presidency of the Carnegie Steel Co. and from 
the board of directors of United States Steel. One of the underlying concerns 
of the new Midvale company is the Remington Arms Co., which has a contract 
to manufacture 2,000.000 Enfield rifles for the British Government. 

The International Nickel Co. also interlocks with the Midvale concern through 
Ambrose Monell, who is president of the International Nickel Co. and a director 
of the Midvale Steel & Ordnance Co. 

Seward Prosser, another director of International Nickel, is one of the con¬ 
tributors to the funds of the Navy League, which have been used to banquet 
Secretaries of the Navy and Members of Congress, hire speakers, and carry on 
the elaborate campaign for “preparedness” which the Navy League has been 
carrying on most earnestly for the last 13 years, and which promises now to 
bear fruit in the form of staggering increases in Army and Navy appropriations. 

International Nickel also interlocks directly with the United States Navy 
Department, through W. H. Brownson, retired rear admiral, who is a director 
of the International Nickel Co. and on the pay roll of the Government at a 
salary of $6,000 a year, which is three-fourths full pay. “ Who’s Who ” for 
1914-15 gives Admiral Brownson’s address as “ Navy Department, Washington, 
D. C.” Admiral Brownson is, no doubt, of more value to the International Nickel 


20 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


Co. in Washington, where lie comes into intimate contact with fellow naval 
officers, than he would be any place else. 

Are there any reasons, other than purely patriotic ones, why officers and 
directors of the Nickel Trust might be urging, through the Navy League, a 
$500,000,000 bond issue for battleships, etc.? Light may be had on this subject 
by referring to a table to be found on page 5259 of the Congressional Record, 
last session. The table in question is headed “ Metal per ton of armor,” and is 
a part of the report of Senator Tillman, Representative Padgett, and Admiral 
Strauss, of the Navy Department, as to the cost of manufacturing armor plate. 

This table states that of every $5,274 worth of metal used in the manufacture 
of armor plate $2,953 represents the value of the nickel scrap and $1,466 repre¬ 
sents the value of the metallic nickel used in the manufacture of armor. 

Nor is the use of nickel confined to armor plate. It goes into ammunition 
hoists, communication tubes and turrets, deck, hull, and ship plates, guns and 
gun shields, rifles and small arms, torpedo air reservoirs, marine straight-line 
shafting, crank shafts, piston rods, and other marine-engine forgings. As to 
whether the International Nickel Co. is a war trafficker, the Wall Street Journal, 
March 23, 1915, has the following to say: 

“As a result of the demand for cartridges and shells, the International Nickel 
Co. is receiving unusually large orders for nickel. The metal is necessary in 
the manufacture of the various kinds of ammunition, and the various manufac¬ 
turers of munitions, such as Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Remington Arms, 
and Union Metallic Cartridge Co., have found it necessary to increase their 
supply of nickel.” 

The Wall Street Journal of May 22 reported that the business of the Nickel 
Trust was soaring higher and higher, and that the “ increase in business was 
mainly due to the war.” 

- International Nickel advanced nine points in one day. 

Nickel is used in the manufacture of submarines to a considerable extent. 
It is made use of, according to the Wall Street Journal, in the new electric 
batteries for submarines, invented by Thomas A. Edison, which will prevent the 
generation of chlorine gas. In this instance the nickel supplants lead. Another 
source of increased revenue is the high price of copper. The company's ore re¬ 
covery is estimated to be about 70 per cent nickel and 30 per cent copper. The 
company owns the most extensive known existing nickel ore deposits. Its 
patented nickel lands in Ontario, Canada, cover 100,000 acres, and in addition 
to this the company owns the town of Copper Cliff. It also owns the shares of 
the Societe Miniere Caledonienne of New Caledonia, which company owns ex¬ 
tensive nickel lands. These lands, it is estimated, will furnish the company 
with at least 60 years’ ore supply. Earnings during the months of June, July, 
and August, according to well-informed interests, were at the rate of between 
25 per cent and 30 per cent a year on the common stock. 

Thus it will be seen that the head of the Navy League has the nickel, plenty 
of it, enough to last for 60 years. All that remains to be done is to get Uncle 
Samuel to buy it. If Col. Thompson can manage to put through the Navy 
League’s proposed $500,000,000 bond issue for battleships, etc*., perhaps the 
Nickel Trust will be able to pay even 50 per cent or 60 per cent on its common 
stock. If there is any more profitable way for the head of the Nickel Trust to 
spend his time than in Washington pointing out to the Senators and Congress¬ 
men the frightful insecurity of the Nation, it would be interesting to know how 
he could do it. It need not be said that he is not a great patriot, and it can not 
be said that he is not a great business man. It is not every man who can make 
patriotism a business and make it pay 20 per cent or 30 per cent! 


CONNECTING LINKS BETWEEN THE NAVY LEAGUE AND THE HOUSE 

& CO., 23 WALL STREET, NEW YORK. 


OE ,T. I>. MORGAN 


The Navy League upon close examination would appear to be little more than 
a branch office of the house of .T. P. Morgan & Co. and a general sales promo¬ 
tion bureau for the various armor and munition makers and the steel nickel 
copper, and zinc interests. At least, they are all represented among’ the di¬ 
rectors, officers, founders, or life members of or contributors to the Navv 
League. ‘ 

Especially are all forms of big business represented, and big business in 
variably heads in at 23 Wall Street, New York. 

J. P. Morgan was formerly treasurer of the Navy League and is now a director 
and contributor. He is a director also of the United States Steel Corporation 
and many other corporations. 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


21 


’. Morgan & Co. and a 
recently a director of 
Co., Temple Iron Co., 
54 other corporations, 


Herbert L. Satterlee, former Assistant Secretary of the Navy Department 
aac ; a brother-in-law of J. P. Morgan, was one of the incorporators and founders 
ot the Na\,\ League and is the present general counsel of the league. 

late J. P. Morgan was one of the founders and principal contributors to 
‘ i e ,, a ' s> ' ^ ea Kue, and as late as June 10, 1915, $2,000 was subscribed on behalf 
of the Morgan estate. 

Edward T. Stotesbury, a member of the firm of J. I J 
director of the Baldwin Locomotive Works, and until 
Cambria Steel Co., Phoenix Iron Co., Riverside Metal 

Mm. Cramp & Sons Ship A Engine Building Co., and ^ ullTO1 wx^ttuuua, 
banks, and trust companies, is one of the honorary vice presidents of the Navy 
League. The Wall Street Journal on July 2G, 1915, reported that the Baldwin 
Locomotive Works had received a war order for $80,000,000 worth of shells 
and other munitions. 

Robert Bacon, former Secretary of State and partner of J. P. Morgan & Co. 
and first director of the United States Steel Corporation, is a director of the 
Navy League. 

Henry C. Frick, a fellow director of J. P. Morgan on both the United States 
Steel Corporation and the National City Bank of New York, is an honorary 
vice president of the Navy League. 

Jacob II. Schiff, a director with J. 1*. Morgan on the National City Bank of 
New York, contributed $1,000 to the Navy League June 10, 1915. 


J. Ogden Armour, a director with J. P. Morgan on the National City Bank of 
New York, was one of a committee which, under the auspices of the National 
Security League, issued a statement certifying as to the patriotism of the Navy 
League. 


Cleveland II. Dodge, a director with J. P. Morgan on the National City Bank 
of New York and a director of the American Brass Co., Commercial Mining Co., 
Copper Queen Consolidated Mining Co., Detroit Copper Mining Co. of Arizona, 
Lackawanna Iron & Coal Co., Montezuma Copper Co., and the United Globe 
Mines, is a life member of the Navy League. Marcellus H. Dodge, a nephew of 
Cleveland H. Dodge, is a director on the boards of the Remington Arms-Union 
Metallic Cartridge Co. and the Remington Arms & Ammunition Co. Cleveland 
H. Dodge is vice president of Phelps, Dodge A Co. (Ltd.), a $45,000,000 corpora¬ 
tion, which is one of the leading factors in the copper industry in the United 
States. Although the millions of Cleveland H. Dodge have been multiplied 
through the increased value of his copper holdings as a result of the European 
war, his firms appear unwilling to share their prosperity with their miners in 
Arizona. Some 5,000 copper miners are now on strike, and because Gov. Hunt, 
of Arizona, has dared to protect them against an invasion of lawless thugs 
and strikebreakers, the mine owners are circulating petitions for his recall. 
The leading corporation involved in the Clifton-Morenci strike is Phelps, Dodge 
& Co., of which Cleveland H. Dodge is vice president. The company in 1912 
earned 23 per cent on its capital of $45,000,000 and paid a 15 per cent dividend. 
To-day copper is higher than at any time in nine years, yet the company refuses 
to grant its men a wage increase or to make any concession. The principal 
property of the company at Clifton paid in 1912 a dividend of 1461 per cent on a 
capital of $1,000,000. 

Joseph P. Grace, a director with J. P. Morgan on the National City Bank of 
New York, is one of the contributors to the funds of the Navy League. 

George F. Baker, jr., a director of the First National Bank of New York and 
a son of a director of the United States Steel Corporation, contributed $1,000 
to the Navy League June 10. 1915. 

Allan A. Ryan, a director of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, is a con¬ 
tributor to the Navy League, and George R. Sheldon, another director of the 
Bethlehem Corporation and also a director of the American Locomotive Co., 
both of which concerns have profited hugely from European war orders, is an 
honorary vice president of the Navy League. Considering that Charles INI. 
Schwab, the president of Bethlehem, is one of the founders of the Navy 
League, it would appear that this war-trafficking firm has full representation 
in this organization. And it always has been well represented. Robert H. 
Sayre, a former general manager of Bethlehem, was a life member of the 
Navy League, and Lieut. J. F. Meigs, who left the Navy Department to go into 
the employ of Bethlehem, was also a life member. 

Beekman Winthrop, a former Assistant Secretary of the Navy and now a 
director of the Lackawanna Steel Co., is a director of the Navy League. 


22 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


Former United States Senator W. A. Clark, the “ copper king of Montana,” 
is a director of the Navy League and a director of the W. A. Clark Titanite 
Explosive Co., Colusa-Parrot Mining & Smelting Co., Equator Mining & Smelt¬ 
ing Co., Henry-Bonnard Bronze Co., Mayflower Consolidated Mining Co., Moul¬ 
ton Mining Co., Ophir Hill Consolidated Mining Co., Original Consolidated 
Mining Co., Sunset Mining Co., United Verde Copper Co., and 26 other corpo- 
ratons. 

Charles F. Brooker, honorary vice president of the Navy League, is president 
and director of the American Brass Co. and a director of the United States 
Smelting, Refining & Mining Co., Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co., 
Mechanics & Metals National Bank of the city of New York, and 15 other 
banks, trust companies, and corporations. On April 10, 1915. Mr. Brooker also 
owned 474 shares of Bethlehem Steel, which was worth $40 a share previous 
to the outbreak of the European war, and went as high as $600 on October 
22, 1915. 

Lewis L. Clarke, treasurer of the Navy League, is a director of the American 
Locomotive Co. The Standard Corporation Service on May 3, 1915, reported 
that the American Locomotive Co. had concluded negotiations with the British 
Government for the manufacture of 5,000.000 shrapnel shells to cost $66,- 
250.000. 

A. Barton Hepburn, honorary vice president of the Navy League, is a 
director of the American Car & Foundry Co., which has received large muni¬ 
tions contracts from the allies. 

Henry B. Joy, vice president of the Navy League, who opposes Government 
manufacture of war munitions, is president of the Packard Motor Car Co., 
which has received large orders from the allies. 

T. Coleman du Pont, president of the Du Pont, de Nemours Powder Co., was 
formerly a vice president of the Navy League. The du Ponts have managed 
to maintain a monopoly of the sale of smokeless powder to the United States 
Government, and have received some $25,000,000 worth of contracts in the last 
10 years. 

I do not desire to make the charge that President Thompson and Secretary 
Dadmun, of the Navy League, are deliberately falsifying in insisting that this 
purely patriotic organization is backed by “ men who will not profit by the 
league’s propaganda,” because it is possible that they have reiterated this 
view so often that they have come to actually believe it themselves. I doubt, 
however, whether they eon convince the American people that they have not 
been imposed upon. 

♦ ’ * sH 

STEEL. 

The following are the steel companies which have representation in the 
Navy League: 

1. United States Steel Corporation, represented through J. P. Morgan, 
director of Navy League and United States Steel; Robert Bacon, director of 
Navy League and United States Steel; Elbert II. Gary, contributor to Navy 
League and chairman of the board of directors and chairman finance com¬ 
mittee United States Steel; Henry C. Frick, honorary vice president Navy 
League and director United States Steel; George F. Baker, jr., contributor to 
Navy League and son of director of United States Steel. The late J. P. Morgan 
was a founder, contributor, and director of the Navy League and the organizer 
and a director of United States Steel. Charles M. Schwab, who is shown in 
Moody’s Manual for 1903 as then president of United States Steel, is shown 
by the official journal of the Navy League for 1903 to have been one of the 
founders of the league in July of the same year. 

2. Bethlehem Steel Corporation, represented through Charles M. Schwab, 
one of the founders of the Navy League and president of Bethlehem, which 
controls the San Francisco Dry Dock Co., the Union Iron Works Dry Dock Co. 
of San Francisco, the Fore River Shipbuilding Co., Harlan & Hollingsworth 
Corporation, and the Titusville Forge Co. Bethlehem is also represented in the 
Navy League through Allan A. Ryan, contributor to the Navy League and 
director of Bethlehem; George R. Sheldon, honorary vice president of the 
Navy League and director of Bethlehem; Charles F. Brooker, a former hon¬ 
orary vice president of the Navy League and stockholder of Bethlehem. The 
above held stock in Bethlehem on September 27, 1915, as follows: Charles M 
Schwab, 38,451 shares; Allan A. Ryan & Co., 13,910. Charles F. Brooker held 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


23 


4 <4 shares on April 10, 1915. Robert H. Sayre, a former general manager of 
Bethlehem, was a life member of the Navy League, and Lieut. .T. F. Meigs, 
resigned, an employee of Bethlehem, was a life member. 

^ 3. Carnegie Steel Co., represented through those connected with the United 
States Steel Corporation, of which it is an underlying company, and was also 
represented before its connection with United States Steel through ex-Secretary 
of the Navy Benjamin F. Tracy, attorney for the Carnegie Co. and one of the 
founders of the Navy League, and indirectly through Albert B. Boardman and 
James It. Soley, who were associated with Mr. Tracy. 

4. Harvey Steel Co., represented through S. S. Palmer, one of the founders of 
the Navy League and president of the Harvey Co., and through ex-Secretary 
Tracy, who was also the attorney for Harvey Co. The Harvey Co. was there¬ 
fore also indirectly represented through Mr. Boardman and Mr. Soley. 

5. Lackawanna Steel Co., represented through Beekman Winthrop, director 
of Lackawanna and director of the Navy League, and through Ogden L. Mills, 
contributor to the Navy League and director of Lackawanna. James Speyer, 
life member of Navy League, was until recently a director of Lackawanna! 

6. Cambria Steel Co., represented until recently by E. T. Stotesbury, of the 
firm of .T. P. Morgan & Co. Mr. Stotesbury was a director of Cambria and 
honorary vice president of the Navy League. 

7. Midvale Steel Co., one of the founders of the Navy League. 

8. Eastern Steel Co., represented through Harry Payne Whitney, one of the 
founders of the Navy League and director of Eastern Steel. 

9. Pennsylvania Steel Co., represented through E. T. Stotesbury, member of 
firm of ,T. 1*. Morgan & Co., honorary vice president of the Navy League, and 
director of Pennsylvania Steel. 

10. Pacific Hardware & Steel Co., represented through D. H. Kane, life mem¬ 
ber of Navy League and formerly director Pacific Hardware & Steel Co. 

11. Federal Steel Co., represented through E. H. Gary, contributor to Navy 
League and president and director of Federal Steel. 

12. Illinois Steel Co., represented through E. H. Gary, contributor to Navy 
League and director of Illinois Steel. 

13. Minnesota Steel Co., represented through E. H. Gary, contributor to 
Navy League and director of Minnesota Steel. 

14. Union Steel Co., represented through E. H. Gary, contributor to Navy 
League and director of Union Steel. 

15. American Steel & Wire Co., New Jersey, underlying property of United 

States Steel Corporation. (See United States Steel.) • 

COPPER. 

Robert M. Thompson, founder, honorary vice president 1903-1909, director 
1901—1914, chairman executive committee 1913-14, president Navy League 1915: 
President Orford Copper Co. 

Andrew Fletcher, jr., member W. & A. Fletcher Co., life members Navy 
League: Director Union Copper Co. 

Rodolphe Agassiz, honorary vice president Navy League 1915: Director La 
Salle Copper Co.; director Superior Copper Co.; director Centennial Copper 
Mining Co.; president and director Isle Royale Copper Co.; vice president and 
director White Pine Copper Co. 

William A. Clark, director Navy League 1914-15: President and director 
United Verde Copper Co. 

Cleveland H. Dodge, life member Navy League: Director Copper Queen Con¬ 
solidated Mining Co.; vice president and director Detroit Copper Mining Co.; 
director Moctezuma Copper Co.; vice president Phelps, Dodge & Co. 

J. H. Harding, contributor to Navy League: Director Amalgamated Copper Co. 

A. C. James, life member Navy League: Vice president and director Burro 
Mountain Copper Co.; vice president and director Copper Queen Consolidated 
Mining Co.; vice president and director Moctezuma Copper Co.; director Detroit 
Copper Mining Co. of Arizona. 

E. Meyer, jr., contributor to Navy League: Director Braden Copper Mines 
Co.; director Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co.; director Utah Copper Co. 

ZINC, LEAD, AND BRASS. 

E. T. Stotesbury, honorary vice president Navy League 1915: Director River¬ 
side Metal Co. 

W. J. Matheson, contributor to Navy League: President and director Mathe- 
son Lead Co. 


24 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


A. C. James, life member: Director American Brass Co. 

Charles F. Brooker, honorary vice president 1909: President and director 
American Brass Co. 

Rodolphe Agassiz, honorary vice president 1915: Director United Zinc A 
Chemical Co. 

S. S. Palmer, founder: President and director Empire Zinc Co.; treasurer and 
director Mineral Point Zinc Co.; president and director New Jersey Zinc Co. 

H. W. Hayden, contributing member: President and director Manhattan 
Brass Co. 

Myron T. Herrick, honorary vice president 1903-1909, 1915: Director United 
Zinc & Chemical Co. 

Cleveland H. Dodge, life member of Navy League: Director American 
Brass Co. 

NICKEL. 

Seward Prosser, contributor to Navy League: Director International Nickel Co. 

Robert M. Thompson, president Navy League 1915, founder, honorary vice presi¬ 
dent 1903-1909, director 1904-1914: Chairman board International Nickel Co. 

THE NINETEEN FOUNDERS. 

I have already called attention to the fact that on page 32 of the February, 
1904, issue of the Navy League Journal, the “ official organ of the Navy League,” 
19 names are published as being those of the “ founders ” of the league. The 
names there listed are as follows: Herbert L. Satterlee, J. W. Miller, J. Pier- 
pont Morgan, Benjamin F. Tracy, Seth Low, Clement A. Griscom, Thomas 
Lowry, Timothy L. Woodruff, Midvale Steel Co., Anson Phelps Stokes, George 
Westingliouse, R. S. Sloan, John J. Astor, R. M. Thompson, Charles M. Schwab, 
John J. McCook, Harry Payne Whitney, George B. Satterlee, S. S. Palmer. 

CLEMENT A. GRISCOM. 

So far 1 have mentioned the business connections of but 3 of the 19 founders. 
Of the others, several of whom are now deceased, I will merely call attention 
to their business connections at the time of their affiliation with the Navy 
League. 

Clement A. Griscom was a fellow director with J. P. Morgan of the United 
States Steel Corporation, which controlled the armor-making Carnegie Steel 
Co. He was also a director of the Wm. Cramp Ship & Engine Building Co. and 
the Electric Boat Co., both of which are war traders. 

HERBERT L. SATTERLEE, PATRIOT NO. 5. 

Herbert L. Satterlee is a brother-in-law of J. P. Morgan. 

COL. ROBERT M. THOMPSON. 

Col. Thompson is chairman of the board of directors of the International 
Nickel Co. and president of the New York Metal Exchange, as previously stated. 


HENRY PAYNE WHITNEY. 


Harry Payne Whitney, at the time lie became one of the 19 founders of the 
Navy League, was a fellow director of the late J. P. Morgan on the National 
Bank of Commerce, on the Clearwater A Racnuette Lake Railroad, on the 
Fulton Chain Railway, on the Fulton Navigation Co., on the Racque’tte Lake 
Railroad Co., and the Newport Trust Co. 


BENJAMIN V. TRACY 


Benjamin F. Tracy, another of the 19 founders, was Secretary of the Navy 
from 1889 to 1893. As Secretary of the Navy Mr. Tracy made contracts with 
the Carnegie Co. and the Harvey Steel Co., and after his term expired became 
the attorney for both concerns. Mi-. Tracy was a director of the Cornucopia 
Mines of Oregon and the Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad Co Died in 1915 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


25 


S. 8. PALM KK. 


S. Palmer, 55 Wall Street, New York, another of the 19 founders of the 
Navy League, was interested in many concerns which would profit from “ pre¬ 
paredness/’ He was president and director of the Harvey Steel Co., a recipient 
of royalties from all armor plate manufactured here and abroad ; president 
and director of the Empire Zinc Co., Mineral Point Zinc Co., New Jersey 
Zinc Co., Empire Zinc Co. of Colorado, New Jersey Zinc Co. of Pennsylvania, 
and a director of the Lackawanna Steel Co., which has received enormous 
orders from the allies, and the Empire Zinc Co. of Missouri. 

JOHN JACOB ASTOK. 

John Jacob Astor was a fellow director of J. P. Morgan on the Western 
Union Telegraph Co. at the time he became one of the founders of the Navy 
League. 

GEORGE WEST1NGHOUSE. 

George Westingliouse, another of the founders of the Navy League, was 
president of 30 corporations with an aggregate capital of $120,000,000. 

1’he Westingliouse corporations have profited enormously from war orders. 
Financial America on August 2, 1915, said: 

"Actual orders on the hooks of the Westingliouse Electric & Manufacturing 
Co. now total between $65,000,000 and $70,000,000. and the company also has 
options on sufficient additional orders to bring the amount up to over 
$ 100 , 000 , 000 .” 

JACOB W. MILLER. 

Jacob IV. Miller, another of the 19 Navy League founders, was at that time 
the general manager of the Marion district of the New York, New Haven & 
Hartford Railroad Co., on the board of directors of which sat J. P. Morgan. 
Mr. Miller is also president of the Costa Rica Development Co., of which Col. 
Thompson, president of the Navy League, is a director. 

ROBERT S. SLOAN. 

Robert S. Sloan is a trustee of the American Surety Co., 100 Broadway, New 
York, and has as one of his fellow trustees William Nelson Cromwell, who is 
also a director of Col. Thompson’s International Nickel Co. Mr. Sloan is also 
president and director of the Fitzgibbons Boiler Co., of Oswego, N. Y. 

ANSON PHELPS STOKES. 

Anson Phelps Stokes was a partner in the firm of Phelps, Dodge & Co., mer¬ 
chants with large copper-mining interests. This firm is now one of the largest 
copper-mining concerns in the United States and is well represented on the 
Navy League. 

The Chairman. Mr. Hensley, how much time would you like in 
which to present your resolution? 

Mr. Hensley. I do not think I would want more than 5 or 10 
minutes, but I felt- 

The Chairman. If the members of the committee can stay, I can 
go and come back. You might go ahead and finish. 

Mr. Hensley. I do not want but just a little time. 

STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER L. HENSLEY, MEMBER OF CON¬ 
GRESS FROM MISSOURI. 

Mr. He nsley. As I understand it, the resolutions pending before 
your committee are those introduced by Mr. Gardner, of Massachu¬ 
setts, and myself. 

Resolved, That the Speaker appoint a select committee of five Members of 
the House, and that such committee be instructed to inquire into the organiza¬ 
tion, membership, expenditures, receipts, and sources thereof of the Navy 



26 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


League, Labor’s National Peace Council, the National Security League, the 
American Defense Society, and any other such organizations as have been 
active in the propaganda for and against the proposed increases in the Army 
and Navy of the United States, and to ascertain what, if any, commercial in¬ 
terest, as shareholder or otherwise, members of such organizations and societies 
have in the manufacture or sale of munitions of war, and for such purposes it 
shall have power to send for persons and papers and administer oaths, hold 
its meetings during the session of Congress, and shall have the right to report 
at any time. The expenses of said inquiry shall be paid out of the contingent 
fund of the House upon vouchers approved by the chairman of said committee, 
to be immediately available. 

Mr. Hensley. Of course, I care little about whose resolution is re¬ 
ported from this committee; it is results that I am interested in, 
nothing more nor less. If the things can be gone into that Mr. 
Tavenner mentions in his resolution, and a prompt investigation 
made that will be of benefit to us all now, I would like very much 
for his resolution to be reported out of this committee. 

However, I will say in this connection that it occurs to me that the 
Committees on Expenditures in the Navy Department and in the 
War Department have jurisdiction of a great many of the things 
mentioned in his resolution. I may be mistaken as to that. 

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, in the first instance 
I desire to say that in the last Congress, after I had made statements 
upon the floor of the House concerning the Navy League, its financial 
support, and its purposes, the secretary of the Navy League addressed 
a letter to me suggesting and insisting upon an investigation, de¬ 
claring that that association was not receiving any money donated 
to it by anybody connected with or benefited by the munition traffic. 
I did not pursue the matter any further at that time. But, in order 
to indicate to the members of the committee to what extent some of 
these people will go—and before I go into that I want to say here 
and now I have never heard anyone who knows Mr. Gardner, at any 
time, on the floor of the House or elsewhere, insinuate in the slightest 
way that he is actuated by other than the very best motives, nor 
have I heard any such insinuations concerning my friend Mr. Tav¬ 
enner. I can not believe that any man Avho appreciates the impor¬ 
tance and the dignity of the position of a Member of Congress will 
permit himself to be used to further the interests of any private 
institutions. I truly hope that is true. 

Only a few weeks ago one Hudson Maxim was either sent or in¬ 
vited to St. Louis—or, at any rate, he visited the city of St. Louis— 
and made a speech there for the ostensible purpose of bringing about 
in the interest of national defense concerted action; and almost 
simultaneously with his appearance there, or a few days after his 
appearance in the city of St. Louis and after the mayor of the city 
bad appointed a committee of 100 to take up the matter and go into 
it and do whatever was necessary to advance the cause of prepared¬ 
ness, there appeared in the newspapers an advertisement of his stocks. 
Permit me to read here just a few lines from the Times, of Novem¬ 
ber 27, 1915, a large daily of the city of St. Louis [reading] : 

The publication of statements by members of Mayor Kiel’s committee of 100 
on the visit to St. Louis of Hudson Maxim, and the subsequent advertisement 
of stock in the Maxim Munition Corporation, organized to take over Mr. 
Maxim’s inventions of munitions of war, continued Saturday to create com¬ 
ment on the part of members of the committee. Mayor Kiel issued a statement 
in which he said he did not believe munitions manufacturers had put anything 
over on the National Security League. 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


27 


Mayor Kiel appointed the committee at the request of Horace D. Johns, who 
is listed in the directory as associate manager of the National Surety Co., with 
offices in the Pierce Building. Mr. Johns is secretary of the National Security 
League’s branch in St. Louis. 

Edward Hidden, president of the Business Men’s League, said that Mr. 
Maxim had been invited last Wednesday to address the members of the league 
at their weekly luncheon just as other noted men have been, and his appearance 
did not commit the league one way or the other. 

When he read the advertisement of the organization of the Maxim Munitions 
Corporation his comment was brief. “That is pretty raw, isn’t it?” he said. 

Rev. Dr. W. C. Bitting, pastor of the Second Baptist Church, also refused 
appointment to the mayor’s committee of 100 it became known Saturday. An¬ 
other was Frederick W. Lehmann and a third was Attorney Henry S. Caul¬ 
field, jr. 

Now, then, we see there the effect that this is having. 

Mr. Foster. Let me see that paper. 

Mr. Hensley. It is quite a long article. I can not read all of it 
[handing paper to Mr. Foster]. 

The St. Louis Times has another article upon the same proposition. 
These people are asserting that they are going into the district of 
every Member of Congress who does not vote for the proposed in¬ 
crease. It occurs to me that it is time that the country is finding 
out who are the people who are behind this movement, and I think 
there should be some method employed to differentiate, to separate all 
men who stand with Mr. Gardner—and I say that sincerely and can¬ 
didly—who are honestly in favor of increases and believe that that 
is vital to the perpetuity of this country to prevent invasion from 
those fellows who are actuated wholly and solely by the desire to 
make money out of this increase. 

Here we find Mr. Maxim. The National Security League repu¬ 
diated him and said he was not a member of that organization and 
“ we are not responsible for his appearance in St. Louis and the 
speech he made there.” We find that lie comes back and insists that 
the man connected with the Security League who denounced him is 
in the employ of men who are engaged in the munition business. . So 
there you are. Let me read what he says on that proposition—just 
a portion of it—I can not read it all because I have not the time. I 
read from the editorial page of the St. Louis Republic, under date 
of Sunday, January 16, 1916 (reading) : 

I understand that Mr. Menken himself is counsel for one of the largest dealers 
in munitions of war in America, and has been counsel for him for years. Con¬ 
sequently Mr. Menken can hardly make good his claims that he has received 
no support from manufacturers of war munitions. 

Mr. Ciii perfield . Is that the one the Southern Transaction Co. 
sought to promote ? 

Mr. Hensley. This is Maxim. Maxim came out a few days ago 
in the St. Louis paper, and this is also a letter signed by him in which 
he declared that no one was advancing money to him; that he is 
not in the employ of any of these associations; that he had tried to 
get other folks engaged in the munition business to contribute and 
to pay money to carry on this propaganda, but that they would 
not do so, but that lie was one of the “ simon-pure ” patriots; that he 
wanted to prevent war, and these other fellows, believing if they 
would wait until the country actually got into war would get greater 
profits out of their business, were refraining from pushing this 
propaganda, but that Maxim wanted something now. He wants to 


28 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


sell to the Government; and you members of the committee will 
recall that only a few days ago you received a letter from a brokerage 
concern in which they said—I have forgotten whether it is Maxim’s 
inventions or not, but some of those concerns—and they insisted in 
that brokerage letter they had contracts already which would rep¬ 
resent at least 200 per cent upon the stock. 

Mr. Bennet. I guess only those Members of Congress who have 
money received that letter. 

Mr. Hensley. Well, I have heard several Members say they have 
not received it, but upon careful investigation they found they had 
thrown it aside, as Members often do with such things. But I pre¬ 
sume every Member of Congress received the letter. I have re¬ 
ceived it. 

I should say here that there are a great body of men in this 
country who honestly believe that we are unprepared; there is a 
great body of people in this country who are confused with ref¬ 
erence to what we have to-day. Many of our people think that we 
have not a battleship worth mentioning. They don’t really know 
that we have some of the best fighting craft afloat to-day. 

I do not make the charge that the money expended by the Navy 
Department has been wasted. If I wanted to make a deadly charge 
against that department, that is the sort of a charge I would make. 
I do say, however, that the money has not been employed to give 
the American people a dollar’s worth in every respect, and in some 
instances I think there has been waste. But we have expended 
hundreds of millions of dollars more than Germany in the last 10 
years, and for that great amount of money we have something to 
represent it. 

Mr. Foster. You think, then, w 7 e have a good Navy now, do you, 
Mr. Hensley? 

Mr. Hensley. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Foster. An efficient Navy? 

Mr. Hensley. I think we have an efficient Navy in every respect. 
1 think our Navy is the second greatest Navy afloat. In support 
of my opinion I quote Admiral Fletcher and Capt. Winterhalter 
during hearings before Naval Affairs Committee last year, and men 
of that class and type—men who know whereof they speak. 

The Chairman. Mr. Hensley, you are a member of the Committee 
on Naval Affairs, and from the testimony you have heard there 
you think that our Navy is efficient and sufficient? 

Mr. Hensley. Having studied the question closely and critically 
I declare that the appropriations are needed for auxiliaries for our 
Navy to make each unit of our Navy a properly balanced fighting 
force. But, gentlemen of this committee, it has seemed to me, from 
the time I have been on the committee, that the effort put forth all 
the time has been for increases in the units—additional battleships— 
and these other things have been lost sight of. 

Mr. Bennet. We ought to have more cruisers; ought we not? 

Mr. Hensley. Yes, sir; I think that. I do not know whether we 
should abandon our heavy boats and sacrifice armor for speed; I do 
not know T as to that. The military men themselves disagree on that 
proposition; they are not in accord. 

The Chairman. With the permission of the committee I will ask 
you this: Will you state in your remarks, if you do not care to go 
into it now, just what ought to be added to the Navy; just what sort 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


29 


of a program you think is necessary ? I do not mean in detail, but in 
general terms what you think should be done to make the Navy 
adequate. 

Mr. Hensley. No doubt myself and others will give the House 
the benefit of our information along this line in the form of a 
minority report or otherwise when the present hearings on the bill 
are concluded and the bill is reported to the House. 

The Chairman. I thought you had your figures prepared, and I 
have great regard for your opinion about these things, and personally 
I want your views, and to have it in this record. 

Mr. Hensley. I would prefer to wait until our present hearings 
are concluded before expressing myself fully on the subject. 

The Chairman. It would be very valuable to go in this hearing. 

Mr. Hensley. I insist that each Member of this House owes it not 
only to himself and his family, but to the people and the country at 
large to show that none of these influences have touched him, and I 
am in accord with the proposition made by Mr. Gardner, that an in¬ 
vestigating committee should call before it any Member of the House 
or the Senate and inquire what relation he bears to this movement, 
either on one side or the other. 

Last year, during the last session of Congress, the secretary of the 
Navy League gave out a statement to the effect that at a banquet 
given by the Navy League—and they have heretofore been giving some 
very rare and rich ones, attended by our officers, all of them—he had 
a conversation with Mr. Hensley, of Missouri, and that Mr. Hensley 
had said to him that he would be entirely willing to go ahead and in¬ 
crease the Navy, to vote the appropriations for these increases, if it 
were not for the fact that he (Hensley) needed these appropriations 
for his own district for internal developments. 

Mr. Bennet. Who made that statement? 

Mr. Hensley. Dadmun, secretary of the Navy League. 

Mr. Bennet. Secretary of the Navy League? 

Mr. Hensley. Yes, sir. I never attended a Navy League banquet 
in my life, and in my present state of mind I think I can say that I 
never shall. 

I have told those people, “If you have anything important that 
you want to discuss with me to come to my office and let us go over 
it. I care nothing about your smokers and banquets, where you are 
sandwiched in between officers of the Army and Navy and other in¬ 
terested persons.” 

I think we owe it to ourselves and to the country to find out how 
many people are honestly in favor of increases, so that we can re¬ 
spond, if we do find an honest sentiment in this country, as against 
listening to that crowd of fellows who come with “ dirty hands.” 

You can not tell me that there is a class of fellows in this country 
engaged in the munition business that are actuated from wholly 
patriotic motives in disseminating sentiment for increases. If you 
will cut out the profits they are making, do you mean to tell me that 
they would continue in the munition traffic? Not a bit of it. We 
owe it to the people to let them know the condition our Nation is in, 
to let them know our state of preparedness to-day; and how we are 
able to repel any invading forces. Then let them, in addition to 
that, know to a certainty by our pointing out in the hearings and the 


30 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 


report on the hearings who the men are who have been engaged in 
this propaganda. 

Only last summer you recall Mr. J. P. Morgan, at the very incep¬ 
tion—not, however, before the gentleman from Massachusetts urged 
these things, because he began some two Congresses ago—but early 
last spring he and his compatriots gathered around their banquet 
board when thousands of dollars were raised in a few minutes time; 
and it was this meeting which the Associated Press said would bring 
about a $500,000,000 appropriation by this Congress. 

The Chairman. What date was that? 

Mr. Hensley. That was last summer, sir. 

The Chairman. Have you that Associated Press report? 

Mr. Hensley. I fear I have not, but a gentleman told me, in my 
office, that he was present at that meeting, and since that time he has 
been in the employ of some of those leagues, going over the country 
and making speeches. 

The Chairman. I think it would be interesting to insert that in 
the record. 

Mr. Hensley. Yes; I may be able to get that. But that was 
early last spring, and I am not so sure that I kept it, but I could go 
to the Congressional Library and find it. 

Mr. Foster. You have his name? 

Mr. Hensley. Oh, the party who told me that in my office? 

Mr. Foster. Yes. 

Mr. Hensley. Oh, yes; I know him very well. He has been in 
the employ of the Navy League, and is now employed by the Ameri¬ 
can Defense Society. 

Mr. Chiperfield. Can you give his name? 

Mr. Hensley. No; I would not like to, but I can see him, and I 
think he will give me permission to use his name. 

I never got a dollar out of this business. I am a member of the 
Missouri Peace Society, contributing $1 or $2 a year. 

Mr. Bennet. Will the gentleman answer a question or two, if he 
is through with his statement? 

Mr. Hensley. I believe I am through. I wish you gentlemen 
could read these entire articles showing the stir in St. Louis by 
reason of Maxim’s appearance and his speech, and simultaneously 
with it this advertisement that appeared in the paper about selling 
his stock. It seems to me that these matters are not trifling things. 
We can not waive them aside. We owe a duty to ourselves and our 
country to go into these things to find out to a certainty where we 
stand and who the fellows are that are promoting it. 

Mr. Bennet. This great committee of which you are a member, 
and in which you have confidence, I do not suppose is being swayed 
on the one hand or the other? 

Mr. Hensley. I hope not. I do not believe it is. 

The fact of the business is, one of the oldest men on that com¬ 
mittee, one of the grandest characters in Congress, who heretofore at 
all times voted for increases, seems to be leaning the other way. 

Mr. Bennet. No matter which way he is leaning he is being influ¬ 
enced by the testimony before the committee. 

Mr. Hensley. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Bennet. And in due time your committee is going to report 
to the House, I presume, a program one way or the other, based on 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIGATION. 31 

the testimony and your own consciences and oaths of office, are you 
not? 

Mr. Hensley. Yes; I think that is absolutely true. 

Mr. Ben net. Do you not think that the House will be swayed 
and moved more by the report of you gentlemen, in whom they 
have confidence- 

Mr. Hensley. That sounds entirely all right. 

Mr. Lenroot. A unanimous report? 

Mr. Ben net. Anyway, they will report the testimony. 

Mr. Hensley. You gentlemen know how jealous fellows are of 
their political standing, and how they are ready to grasp at straws 
sometimes in order to succeed themselves, and threats are being 
made by these people that they are going into the district of each 
opponent of this program and campaign against him. 

Mr. Bennet. I am frank to say—this is my fourth Congress— 
and I think any man in Congress that would be swayed in his duty 
by a threat ought to get out to-morrow. 

Mr. Hensley. I agree with you. 

Mr. Chiperfield. You do not contend it will cut very much figure 
in your district? 

Mr. Hensley. .1 do not think it will. 

Mr. Chiperfield. The Junior Order of Mechanics makes its threats 
that they will come into my district, but it has not swayed me. 

Mr. Hensley. Those things are not pleasing to anyone, and why 
not find out who these people are when they appear, whether they 
are being paid, and the source, and who the fellows are who are 
profiting by whatever impressions these representatives create in 
your district and mine? 

Mr. Bennet. Do you think we could find anything more on that 
side than Mr. Tavenner has put into the record? Have you heard his 
speech ? 

Mr. Hensley. I heard it and read it. 

Mr. Bennet. Both? 

Mr. Hensley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bennet. We must assume the fellow Member of the House 
told the truth. 

Mr. Chiperfield. That is the presumption. 

Mr. Bennet. The presumption. He has given a list in detail of 
these men. How could we possibly hope to find out anything more 
from that viewpoint than we have? 

Mr. Hensley. A committee would have greater opportunities, by 
reason of its powers, for gathering information; and besides this the 
question is of such vital importance to the people at large that we 
owe it to them to exhaust every means to inform them of the real 
facts. If it is found that there is nothing else to be found, the com¬ 
mittee still will have rendered a great service. 

Mr. Chiperfield. But even if all that were true, and even if every 
assertion Mr. Tavenner has made is true, and the statements made 
in the press are true, should that one way or the other sway the duty 
that this House owes to the country upon the question of prepared¬ 
ness —would it accomplish anything, or would it get anywhere? 

Mr. Hensley. If we need one battleship to defend this country, to 
protect the rights of our people on the water or land, or an increase 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 


32 


PEACE PROPAGANDA INVESTIG. 


in the Army, or we really need 10 battleships, 0 011 392 488 3 
is needed in the Army, I will stand for it absolutely, but I insist] 
that we do not need it, when you come to that part of it; but Mr. 
Gardner and I do not agree upon that. 

Mr. Bennet. You base your contention on the evidence that is be-] 
ing gathered before your committee, do you not? 

Mr. Hensley. There are a whole lot of people in this country—j 
it reaches up into a large percentage—who have not a correct idea] 
with respect to our defenses now, and they are being excited, every¬ 
thing is being said that can possibly be said to stir those people up! 
and make them believe we should go in for a tremendous increase of] 
both our Army and Navy. 

Mr. Bennet. Is not our duty as Members- 

Mr. Hensley. These fellows are insisting all over the country, 
and are down here at the Willard this week, and if you read the! 
speeches there you can not help but get this conclusion from their 
speeches, that they are the “ true patriots,” and that every Member] 
who does not stand with them and is not ready to vote every dollar out; 
of the Treasury for increases in the Navy and the Army is not a 
patriot and has not the right conception of his duty. I challenge; 
that. I say those fellows, lots of them, do not believe that sort of I 
thing, and if we get behind them and find out what is actuating them,.] 
the country would say, “ Pshaw, we had better take things easy.” 

Mr. Bennet. Would you say the same thing about Miss Jane] 
Addams ? 

Mr. Hensley. Any of those people who are getting up and selling! 
out at so much per. 

Mr. Bennet. Is it not our duty as Members of Congress, placing; 
our duty on the high plane where it ought to be, to decide these ques¬ 
tions as to the needs of the country, and is not the best place for us | 
to go to find out what the needs are, the testimony that is being taken 
systematically and coherently before your committee and the Com¬ 
mittee on Military Affairs? 

Mr. Hensley. That is true, for our guidance as Members of the 
House, but the people of the Nation are entitled to the same consider¬ 
ation in this matter. We do not want the propaganda carried along 
this line or along any other lines, for that matter, that have corrupt 
purposes behind them. 

Mr. Chiperfield. But men who have financial gains to make will 
always attach themselves to movements. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you a question. Would you think a 
man who owned cotton lands who should grow cotton for the manu¬ 
facture of projectiles that he was suspicious? 

Mr. Hensley. Not necessarily so. I have tried a great many dam¬ 
age suits, and often in presenting a case against corporations for 
damages I would have been willing to have had certain officers of 
the corporation who were affected the most as members of the jury. 
But you could not afford to do that. If you would put them on the 
jury they would do only what was just and right in every particular 
and yet on account of the appearances—the effect of it over the 
country—you could not do that at all. That is bad argument. 

The Chairman. The committee will now stand adjourned to meet 
Friday morning at 11 o’clock. 

(Thereupon, at 12.30 o’clock p. m., the committee stood adjourned 
to meet Friday, January 21, 1916, at 11 o’clock a. m.) 

X 




































